HB 114

[Tom_in_CA]

In all the flurry of posts about a few individual cities within Kentucky, not much is being said about this statewide bill:

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/09RS/HB114.htm

Mark S brought it up within a post several weeks back, but I believe it needs a post specifically for this, so I'm bringing up the link again to post here. This link is just for the short summary. To get the whole text, click on the "HB114" on the left margin near the top. While most of it deals with burials and bones, they do lump "artifacts" into it. Notice their definition of "archaeological site" can be just anywhere that artifacts can be found. Ie.: "farms, ruins, etc...." And "artifacts" are anything 100 yrs. old or more.

This bill has come up and been defeated several times already, but it's up again for a vote. Anyone know the date it's up for a vote?

I suppose if this passes, just have some cruddy memorials ready to show them. I mean, can they really a patrol all the private farms, orchards, mountains, yards, etc....? And do they really watch you dig each target to see if it's 100 yrs. or more old? (your math never was too good, eh? )

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Mark S.]

The bill is sitting in the judiciary committee. There has been no movement on it. It is my understanding that it has little support.

Mark S.

 

[weldermark]

this bill has been up since early 2007 it was hb 117,now hb114,are you people for real is this a joke or what??


mark

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Mark S, thanx for the feed-back. As I read all the minutia, I couldn't help but think how even the most calloused fellow law-maker wouldn't read that and think "why bother? where's the funding for such silly things going to come from? who the heck's going to go around digging up skulls to begin with?" etc... And did you see the crossed out stuff at the end, about sex with corpses? I mean, c'mon!

 

[allen]

why dont "they" just leave us alone....

 

[mrjosh]

They way I read this is that it applies to burial sites. Not arround homesteads and other areas. If I understand it right I dont see a problem. NO ONE needs to go digging up a burial site of anyone Indian, or who ever.

 

[Mark S.]

You are reading the bill exactly the way they want you to. You are missing what they have hidden in it.

Here is a little background. The areas in the bill in question were tried years ago as a stand alone bill and did not get anywhere so they hid it inside this cemetery bill.

Here are the pertinent parts;

SECTION 2. A NEW SECTION OF KRS CHAPTER 171 IS CREATED TO READ AS FOLLOWS:
(1) Except for any lawful investigatory purpose authorized by law, no person shall conduct an excavation of an archaeological site on private property without obtaining a permit issued by the council. A person desiring to conduct an excavation of an archaeological site on private property shall apply for a permit by filing a written plan with the council for its approval.

And the pertinent definition;

(1) "Archaeological site" means any place where artifacts that are valuable for the scientific study of historic or prehistoric human life and activities may be found, including but not limited to historic and prehistoric structures, ruins, pictographs and petroglyphs, mounds, burial grounds, forts, mines, farmsteads, quarries, house sites, and industrial or commercial sites;

These sections say nothing about burials. The authors (Kentucky Heritage Council) were hoping that everyone would read it as you did and think that it all deals with burials. When in fact these sections, according to their own definition, do not. They were not planning on people actually reading everything carefully and discovering their deceit.

To add to this - Last year I spoke to someone (from the archaeology field) who was working closely with a legislator in opposition to this bill. The sponsor and the KHC said that the bill was not meant to stop alll digging on private property, just disturbing burials. When ask to remove all the wording such as I have quoted above, they flat refused.

This is a textbook example of why I carefully read thru any bill that I run across dealing with archaeology concerns.


Mark S.

 

[sonny61]

they would not have to follow us around to see what we find. all they have to do is read our daily postings

 

[Mark S.]

You are very correct with that assumption. In many cases we are our own worst enemy.

 

[mrjosh]

I guess I just see things differnt than many do. Some sites do need to be preserved for future generations. I have had the oppertunity to assist on several acheological digs and have been invited to assist with more. What is taken from these sites are treasures that we all can enjoy and learn from not just a few who found the site or treasures before. If I find that I must go to burial grounds or sites of great historical or prehistorial signiface to md, I think it may be time to find a new hobby. I truely disappoints me that a narrow minded population can ruin anything. We need to help save sites that so that a children and grandchidren can enjoy them.
Not to take this wrong, I am researching a story within 100 miles of here where a large amount of gold is buried. I think if someone can find the location they should be able to seek it. It does does not have a historical impact. As well as many other caches, treasures, ect.

 

[Lookin]

If that gold is buried in a Louisville park, the city considers it an artifact. In fact, under the definitions of what I have heard, yesterdays McDonald's coffee cup is considered an artifact, just like yesterday's pocket change, or any other object found in the parks. I can't wait until I see a city crew or volunteer group (or even a good citizen, like the MD'ers used to be) picking up trash. I am going to report those collections of "artifacts" to the metro call center!

I doubt that anyone would disagree with you - significant artifacts do need to be preserved and/or properly documented. But banning an activity under the guise that anything found is considered an artifact is ridiculous, in my opinion.

Good luck finding the gold. I hope it isn't in a Louisville Metro Park...

Lookin